“If it was not for the accused’s attempt in changing ‘horses’, we will not be here today,” ad hoc prosecutor V Sithambaram told a five-member panel hearing the former prime minister’s bid to secure a review of the apex court’s decision dismissing his appeal.
The panel is headed by Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Abdul Rahman Sebli.
It also comprises Justices Vernon Ong, Rhodzariah Bujang, Nordin Hassan and Abu Bakar Jais.
The law allows every accused person to engage a lawyer of his or her choice, said Sithambaram, but a new lawyer must be ready to act even if appointed close to the hearing date.
“He or she cannot change to lawyers who are not willing to (proceed with the scheduled hearing) or else, it would open to ‘floodgates’ where everyone can come to court to seek an adjournment.
“This will lead to problems in the administration of justice,” he said.
The prosecution said Najib’s affidavit filed in support of the motion claimed that he had been “assured by the newly appointed lawyers that the Federal Court would give them reasonable time to prepare for the main appeal hearing”.
“Has this become a customary practice now, where lawyers can come to court to adjourn their cases and, if the request is dismissed, they can ask for a review later?” asked Sithambaram.
In July last year, less than one month before the hearing date of the appeal, Najib appointed law firm Zaid Ibrahim Suflan TH Liew & Partners as solicitors to take over conduct of the appeal from Shafee & Co. He also appointed Hisyam Teh Poh Teik as lead counsel.
However, Najib discharged Zaid’s firm soon after his application for leave to adduce fresh evidence was rejected by the Federal Court.
At the same time, the Federal Court refused Hisyam’s request to be discharged as lead counsel. Hisyam had sought to be relieved after his application to postpone the appeal was rejected.
Instead, he was told to continue representing Najib until the completion of the case.
Abu Bakar, who co-opted to sit on the panel hearing the motion for review, asked Sithambaram if the lower courts had denied Najib’s bids to postpone the case in the past.
Sithambaram said the Court of Appeal had rejected one such request, made just before the scheduled delivery of the appeals court’s decision on Najib’s initial appeal from the High Court.
The postponement was sought after the defence filed a previous bid to adduce fresh evidence relating to Zeti Akhtar Aziz’s family allegedly receiving funds from Low Taek Jho.
“They asked to adjourn the decision, but the court proceeded with it,” he added.
Najib is currently serving a 12-year jail term after his conviction and sentencing in the SRC case were upheld by the Federal Court.
His appeal to the Court of Appeal from that decision was rejected on Dec 8, 2021.
On Aug 23 last year, a five-member panel of the Federal Court led by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat dismissed his final appeal, and ordered that his prison sentence commence immediately.
In September 2022, Najib filed a motion to review the ruling on the grounds that the court had breached the principles of natural justice, including his right to a fair trial and to counsel.